Earlier this week as I was searching for the latest news, one item that caught my attention was titled, “Al Gore delivers environmental message at Harvard.”

While I won’t launch into a diatribe about Al Gore and the merits and demerits of an impending global catastrophe, allow me to look at what I consider radical environmentalism from both a macro (large) and from a philosophical perspective.

How did we get here? How did Harvard University, America’s oldest (1636) and most prestigious university devolve so far intellectually as to lionize a despicable mental midget and snake oil salesman like Al Gore to export his demagogic brand of environmental propaganda?

Ostensibly Gore was invited to help Harvard University launch its greenhouse gas reduction effort. Harvard thinks that by lowering its own greenhouse gas emission 30 percent by 2016 that this august achievement relegated to a small tract of land in Cambridge, Mass., will “help save the planet.”

China, India, U.S. and Western Europe’s exponential greenhouse gas emissions notwithstanding, I smell a rat!

We live in revolutionary times, where since the 1890s progressive elites have waged war on every aspect of America’s exceptionalism – its educational, cultural, religious, legal, economic, business and intellectual traditions.

Al Gore’s brand of radical environmentalism is just the latest of a plethora of sophistic ideas out of the liberal academy rooted in Marxism, socialism, egalitarianism, empiricism, positivism, postmodernism and other dangerous and failed ideas of the past.

Remember that the modern environmentalist movement grew out of 1960s counter-cultural revolution in America. Marxist radicalism, liberation theology, pagan worship, FDR/LBJ welfare statism and other Machiavellian ideas, which couldn’t be achieved via the democratic process, were surreptitiously brought in through the back door as a diabolical tactic for Democrats to take more of your liberty, self-reliance and money and give it to someone else that didn’t earn it and therefore shouldn’t have it. It’s Marxist class warfare writ large.

Last Wednesday, I was invited to participate in a fascinating political forum on the differences between Democrats and Republicans sponsored by the junior class at Savannah State University. One of my colleagues, Professor Leonard McCoy, told the group that they should ask me to represent the Republican Party. I agreed to participate on the panel representing not so much the Republican Party but the conservative side of the argument.

I knew that the fix was in.

One professor that I had invited earlier that day (Dr. Johnnie Myers, Associate Professor Social & Behavioral Sciences) attended the event and invited her class to attend. Dr. Myers and I had a spirited discussion on the fundamental policy issue of Democrats I referred to as “socialism” –using the force of law to take money from one group of people (producers) and giving it to another (non-producers).

Dr. Myers was irritated at my characterization of the liberal welfare state of FDR and LBJ, and although I was vastly outnumbered (40-1) at this political form, I held my ground. Furthermore, I argued that Obama economic and domestic proposals amounts to socialism because if enacted will add $1.3 trillion in new taxes to pay for his new welfare programs.

I stated that Thomas Jefferson’s immortal words codified in the Declaration of Independence was a solemn promise to all Americans to be able to be free to fully enjoy “Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

The key word here is “pursuit.” All Americans must diligently seek after what is good by using all of their God-given faculties, NOT have the government take the hard-earned money from one group of citizens and give it to another who did nothing to earn it. Thus I argued that socialism is not only unconstitutional, it is a betrayal of the original intent of the Constitution’s framers.

While I’m not sure if I was able to convince Dr. Myers, a number of students after the program and the next day told me how appreciative they were to hear another political philosophy other than liberalism and socialism on a college campus.

Returning back to Al Gore’s keynote speech at Harvard University earlier this week on the impending apocalypse of manmade global warming, Gore’s thesis was this: unless we humans drastically change our lifestyle and energy usage to comport with his global warming thesis and the environmentalist elites at Harvard, mankind is doomed.

I find Gore’s credibility increasingly suspect especially since recently a growing number of Ph.D. scientists have risked their careers by predicting just the opposite of Gore’s global warming theory – that the world has for the past 10 years been in a global cooling period.

Where is Gore’s Ph.D. in atmospheric physics, geology, geothermal science or climatology? Gore failed to get into law school, was a “C” student at Harvard and now Harvard is saying that this political hack is the prophet that will save the world from our impending global catastrophe? I’m not convinced.

The article on Gore’s Harvard speech made this interesting remark: “Gore, Riffing off Harvard’s Latin motto of [Veritas] “truth,” he said the challenge is to find truth in the climate crisis and “use that as a basis of a new concept of who we are.”

How, you may ask dear reader, can hundreds of Ph.D.s and other credentialed academics at Harvard, a repository of the best and brightest academic minds in the world, be so intellectually vacuous and naïve to believe the sophistic, unscientific premises of global warming while stubbornly ignoring all other plausible empirical evidence to the contrary?

The great English writer George Orwell, who penned the book, “Animal Farm,” and “1984” – forgotten anti-totalitarian classics that mocked the progressive intellectuals, social engineers and secular academics of the 1920s–50s that gleefully followed the siren song of Darwin, Marx, Freud, Lenin, Mussolini, Stalin, Hitler, Mao and the myriad varieties of what Jonah Goldberg referred to as “liberal fascism” – said it best: “In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.”

Note: Read our discussion guidelines before commenting.